Being paid for something is the result of a simple business transaction between 2 parties. Last time I checked it is not illegal.

Questionable and illegal are different.

If a person exchanges his/her time for pay collecting signatures I have no problem with it, provided the signatures are valid.

It (used to be?) is the American way.

Fine. Work for pay is honorable, even in politics. A political campaign isn't carried out entirely through volunteers. But money in politics matters. In fact, Scott Walker's antagonists lambaste him for his connection to monied interests. Some folks stress getting the money out of politics. They rail about Citizens United and so forth. That's one way to go, the wrong way I think, because it's not going to work and it violates freedom of speech. But part of freedom of speech — key to the majority's opinion in Citizens United — is the public's interest in receiving information. In this light, what is crucial when it comes to money in politics is that we the public receive information about who's spending the money and where.

Thus, what I want is to know to what extent signature-gatherers are being paid. Who is being paid, how much, and by whom? I want to follow the money.

The implication and denial in the original article illustrates a hopelessly rudimentary idea of compensation. To the extent to which signature gatherers are public employees they are volunteering in hopes of future compensation. They are not being paid ... yet.

And this slices to the heart of the problem. A large class of people are subsidized by the government to petition the government for more subsidies.

Is the implication meant to be that people are being paid for their signatures?

No, the implication is that is someone is being paid for the number of signatures they gather or on meeting a quota, it makes it more likely that we’ll see fraudulent signatures (e.g. duplicates, fake names, people signing other people’s names, etc.) in order to hit the targeted number.

Triangle Man said...Is the implication meant to be that people are being paid for their signatures?

No, he's referring to the leftist playbook as implemented by ACORN:

Johnson and another prolific registrant were subpoenaed to testify at a meeting Monday as the Elections Board continued its look at possible fraud by ACORN, a national organization that tries to get low- and moderate-income people to register. ACORN's methods have drawn interest in a number of states this presidential election year.

Johnson, 19, said he mostly was trying to help ACORN workers who begged him to sign up because they needed to keep their jobs.

"They'd come up with a sob story why they needed the signature," said Johnson, of Garfield Heights.

ACORN leaders have acknowledged that workers paid by the hour were given quotas to fill.

"This may go up on the Politifact Wall of Shame? For those keeping score, out of 38 statements Politifact has vetted:"

I've covered this a few weeks ago. Let's recap:

Scott Walker: The sky is blue.

Politifact: The sky also contains clouds which show the sky to be also be shades of white and gray. The sky is not blue during the night. The sky is not blue most of the time. We rate Scott Walker's claim that the sky is blue as Mostly False.

Local Channel 3 did a follow-up on Walker's claim and found no evidence of paid re-call workers. So far on TV the only ads about the issue that I have seen have been in support of Walker-- I wonder who has paid for those?

Does anyone have a copy of any pay-stubs that prove their assumption to be correct, or is this just another example of the Republicans making things up as they go?

The only evidence we have that petitioners are being paid for collecting signatures are Republicans in the last recall that paid out of state felons. When a Republican accuses you of something, you can bet money they're already doing it.

"Local Channel 3 did a follow-up on Walker's claim and found no evidence of paid re-call workers. So far on TV the only ads about the issue that I have seen have been in support of Walker-- I wonder who has paid for those?"

Got a link to this "follow-up" study they did that found no evidence? My study found no evidence that they did such a study. Because my study sucked. It's easy to find no evidence, so that's why I'm wondering what it is this thing you didn't link to was.

I just want a whole lot of transparency about where the interests are on these recalls.

I just want a whole lot of transparency about where the interests are on these recalls

Since the WI-GOP already admitted that they did use paid petitioners for their last recall efforts, were you able to get the "Who is being paid, how much, and by whom?" answers from them or are they keeping all that a secret?

Meanwhile, this story has a response from the Dems in regard to signature-gatherers being paid: http://www.channel3000.com/politics/29937655/detail.html

"Being paid for something is the result of a simple business transaction between 2 parties. Last time I checked it is not illegal."

Correct. But lying is immoral and it is harming our Republic. Paying demonstrators then calling them an uprising instead of paid goons is a lie and it harms our country. Socializing a private companies risks while keeping the profit private then railing against the 1% you just bailed out is a hypocritic lie and it also hurts our country.

Lies are often not illegal, but they are immoral and cand certainly be unpatriotic.

It never ceases to amaze me that some folks beleive that being able to sit down at the table in order to negotiate safety rules & workplace conditions with an employer is considered "absurd and obscene."

"It never ceases to amaze me that some folks beleive that being able to sit down at the table in order to negotiate safety rules & workplace conditions with an employer is considered "absurd and obscene."

This is a mischaracterization. But I am not surprised.

Trey, I did stop short of where you pick it up and I agree. I won't defend illegal activities as it pertains to this.

Its not how many votes are cast, but who is counting the votes.

The 'Chicago Way' is alive and well and anyone that denies this is just wrong.

A friend of mine has a sign on her jacket that says,"I have recall petitions if you want to sign one." Just wears it around Madison when she is out and about. As of a couple weeks ago she had collected 28 signatures.

"purplepenquin said...It never ceases to amaze me that some folks beleive that being able to sit down at the table in order to negotiate safety rules & workplace conditions with an employer is considered "absurd and obscene."

You don't even work for a public union so I'm not sure how this is pertinent to you.

But it amazes me that your lack of regularly scheduled lunches and breaks hasn't killed you by now seeing how dangerous they are to your safety and health. Amazing. Glad you have survived.

It never ceases to amaze me how some people don't think that politicians and unions sitting at a table in closed meetings where the taxpayers can't monitor what is going on doesn't lead to a fleecing of the taxpayers.

You don't even work for a public union so I'm not sure how this is pertinent to you.

As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. Many of us in my local union are considered employees of cities, counties and even the state. (I've personally been on the payroll of two different cities and the state)

And no, I ain't gonna show you my paystubs or let you call my supervisor on the phone. So quit asking for that, you stalking freak...

Sorry but I think recalls are stupid. I don't think voters should get a mulligan because they have voter remorse. That's what a re-election is for. If you cheeseheads are pissed off that Walker is screwing the pooch then man up and deal with it next election. For you crybabies who didn't vote for him, man up and got him out in the next election.

Id be embarrased to live in that state. A bunch of spoiled kids whining that they want a do-over.

As usual, you don't know what you're talking about. Many of us in my local union are considered employees of cities, counties and even the state. (I've personally been on the payroll of two different cities and the state)"

Thank you for confirming my point and also for the tapdance. Nicely done. You don't work for a public union. That is a fact. Despite the tapdance.

"And no, I ain't gonna show you my paystubs or let you call my supervisor on the phone. So quit asking for that, you stalking freak... I have never asked you for either. I'll wait for your apology.

Democrats aren't whining, they're collecting signatures. Walker was for recalls before he was against them. This a great opportunity for Walker and the Silent Majority to flex their muscles and put the 52% mandate on the line.

The fact is that my union does work in both the public and private sector. Is it your opinion that means we are exempt from the recent changes when we contract with public entities? And is your opinion an educated (ie - Are you currently licensed to practice law in the state of WI?) one?

Bonus Question: If some WEAC members also did private tutoring, would that mean they are also exempt from the recent changes?

"purplepenquin said...You don't work for a public union. That is a fact.

The fact is that my union does work in both the public and private sector. Is it your opinion that means we are exempt from the recent changes when we contract with public entities? And is your opinion an educated (ie - Are you currently licensed to practice law in the state of WI?) one?"

That wasn't so hard now was it. The fact that you do work in the public sector has no bearing. And if you somehow are put in jeopardy by a contract your union makes, then your beef is with your private union. Not the state or Walker. Of course I knew that was the case, which is why you always ignored the question.

"Bonus Question: If some WEAC members also did private tutoring, would that mean they are also exempt from the recent changes?

I have no idea what your are asking. Maybe when you are putting together your apology for the above comment and false accusation, you can clarify.

The only hard thing is trying to understand whatever point you think you are making.

Like I asked before, Is it your opinion that my union is exempt from the recent changes when we contract with public entities? And is your opinion an educated (ie - Are you currently licensed to practice law in the state of WI?) one?

The only hard thing is trying to understand whatever point you think you are making.

Like I asked before, Is it your opinion that my union is exempt from the recent changes when we contract with public entities? And is your opinion an educated (ie - Are you currently licensed to practice law in the state of WI?) one?"

Is CurioGeo the only one who disputes that city/county/state workers in Wisconsin are no longer allowed to collectively bargain for anything except very limited wages? 'cause I thought that was pretty much settled already...

Is CurioGeo the only one who disputes that city/county/state workers in Wisconsin are no longer allowed to collectively bargain for anything except very limited wages? 'cause I thought that was pretty much settled already...

I think his point is that if you were not in a certified public employee's union, that was the case before Walker as well. It has never been the case that anyone working for a public entity who is a member of any union whatsoever is entitled to collectively bargain with the state.

"purplepenquin said...Is CurioGeo the only one who disputes that city/county/state workers in Wisconsin are no longer allowed to collectively bargain for anything except very limited wages? 'cause I thought that was pretty much settled already..."

I have not made that case. I've said you, as a private union employee, are not effected. You are not a member of a public union. You are not a public worker.

Tapdance all you want...but while you do can you provide that apology?

Garage, I could care less if Walker was for recalls. In fact I could care less about Walker. My point is that recall efforts are nothing more than demonstrations of voter remorse. Do a better job of vetting your candidates next time.

Hell I can't stand Obama but I wouldn't support a recall either. We have one every four years and I can only hope the electorate won't be so stupid to elect him again. If so then the voters will have spoken and will then be punished.

Interesting that anyone is questioning whether or not they are paid. Since the Courts changed the law in Colorado we have seen an explosion of ballet initiatives most of which are driven by special interests with the resources to pay for the collection of signatures.

The process was a great deal more "middle of the road" when one had to have enough people interested in the issue to be able to collect signatures.

"I haven't talked to any of the circulators, not at all," said Walker.

This may go up on the Politifact Wall of Shame?"

This is the standard politifact uses. If republicans take the total amount spent on the stimulus, divide it by the number of jobs created and then say that the government spent X per job, Politifact says that is untrue because not all of the money was spent on salary and by golly its just not right to say how much the government spent on things other than salary.

I've said you, as a private union employee, are not effected. You are not a member of a public union. You are not a public worker.

But I am a public worker. As well as a worker in the private sector.

My union represents workers in both the private and public sectors. The changes that were recently enacted don't apply when we contract with private entities (and I never said they did), but of course they apply when we collectively bargain with the city/county/state.

"We need to make it easier for working people to vote through longer voting periods, same-day registration, voting by mail and time off from work for voting. Pass the Employee Free Choice Act to give working people a democratic voice in their workplace. "

They miss some important other affects of this bill. According to the bastion of un-bias, Wikipedia: "section 2 would have eliminated the need for an additional ballot to require an employer recognize a union, if a majority of workers have already signed cards expressing their wish to have a union

section 3 would have required that an employer begins negotiating with a union with a view to reaching a collective agreement within 90 days, and if not, the two sides will be referred to compulsory mediation, and if mediation fails, binding arbitration

section 4 increases the penalties on employers who subject workers to detriment for being involved in a union"

That's about the level of honesty I'd expect from the AFL-CIO. Not that there's anything wrong with paying for signature collection - but if they really supported Obama's call for "Transparency" they should at least admit it.

Hoosier: "My point is that recall efforts are nothing more than demonstrations of voter remorse. Do a better job of vetting your candidates next time."

Well....I can see a recall effort if an officeholder commits a felony (Blago) or perhaps if they wilfully refuse to do their job (fleebaggers). But not just for making unpopular decisions.

"Hell I can't stand Obama but I wouldn't support a recall either."

I wouldn't either...unless it came out that he deliberately ordered Fast & Furious to undermine the 2nd amendment. I believe that's EXACTLY how it worked, but such has not been proven (yet) so no, I wouldn't support a recall at this point either.

Politifact: The sky also contains clouds which show the sky to be also be shades of white and gray. The sky is not blue during the night. The sky is not blue most of the time. We rate Scott Walker's claim that the sky is blue as Mostly False."

May I flip the coin?

Marty Biel: The sky is blue.

Politifact: The sky also contains clouds which show the sky to be also be shades of white and gray, but not most of the time. The sky is not blue during the night, but Biel did not refer to the night sky in his statement. While the sky is not blue most of the time, it is blue during the time that most people observe it. We rate Marty Biel's claim that the sky is blue as Mostly True."

My union represents workers in both the private and public sectors. The changes that were recently enacted don't apply when we contract with private entities (and I never said they did), but of course they apply when we collectively bargain with the city/county/state.

You sound confused. Do you work for a private company that does contract work for the government or are you a government employee? You can't be both at the same time.

When I work for a city or the state I am considered a public employee. Me also working for private businesses doesn't void that fact anymore than a teacher who tutors or a police officer who does security would no longer be called a "public employee."

Like I said before, the paystubs say "State of Wisconsin." I also have ones from two different cities in the state. If you don't think that being on the payroll of the state or a city makes one a "public employee" then you need to please tell us how you are personally defining that phrase...'cause you ain't using it like regular-folks do. And more importantly, you ain't using it like the lawyers and judges do...

Do you work for a private company that does contract work for the government or are you a government employee?

Yes to both. And more. Tho not at the same time.

I am currently on the payroll of several private businesses (which contracts with both gov't and other private businesses) as well as on the payroll of two-three different cities and the state. (And yes, I totally understand it may be confusing to those who do the M-F/9-5 for just one company.)

Pot meet recall kettle...Charity Rorie, a mother of four, sat in her Mishawaka, Ind., kitchen, stunned that her name appeared on a 2008 Democratic presidential primary petition for then-candidate Barack Obama."That's not my signature," she told Fox News, saying her signature is "absolutely" a fake. She also said she was troubled someone forged both her signature and that of her husband, Jeff, and listed personal details such as their address and birthdays."It's scary," Rorie said. "It's shocking. It definitely is illegal. A lot of people have already lost faith in politics and the whole realm of politics, so that just solidifies all of our worries and concerns."Robert Hunter Jr. said his name was faked, too."I did not sign for Barack Obama," he told Fox News, adding his signature supporting the then-Illinois senator's effort to get on the primary ballot was also a forgery.The prospect that theirs are two of an estimated 150 signatures that may have been forged on the petitions has raised the question of whether President Obama actually reached the legitimate number of signatures needed to be placed on the ballot in Indiana. Under state law, presidential candidates need to file 500 signatures from each of the state's nine congressional districts. Indiana election officials say that in St. Joseph County, the Obama campaign qualified with 534 signatures; Clinton's camp had 704. The certified signatures were never challenged."I had always thought that, now-President Obama, had earned his victory in Indiana," said the state's Republican chairman, Eric Holcomb. "But then I quickly learned that he had cheated his way on to the ballot in the primary."The allegations that election fraud touched a race for the highest office in the land are at the center of an investigation by St. Joseph County Attorney Michael Dvorak. He would not comment, but sources say the probe is gaining steam as prosecutors delve into the petitions that sailed through the St. Joseph County Voter Registration Board, located in South Bend. There have been reports that as many as seven people may have been involved in an alleged conspiracy to fake the petitions.He called the alleged forgeries "a sloppy, amateurish effort, ordinarily that kind of thing would have been caught by the voter registration offices. I'm not quite sure here why it slipped through."St. Joseph County Board of Voter Registration worker Dustin Blythe has reportedly been identified as having handwriting that matches the writing on some of the suspect Obama petitions. The South Bend Tribune and the political newsletter Howey Politics Indiana hired a handwriting analyst who examined the documents and says Blythe's writing can be found on "nine suspicious pages from the Obama petition," according to the newspaper.Blythe, 37, works at one of the desks in the Board office. When Fox News asked if he forged any signatures or faked any petitions, he repeatedly replied, "I don't have anything to say."Blythe's LinkedIn profile describes him as a "government employee" who is also an "independent contractor/volunteer at Indiana Democratic Party" and a St. Joseph County Democratic Party "volunteer." His Facebook page includes a photograph of him taken with former Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards.Broden, the local Democratic chairman, thinks that there should be new measures instituted to ensure that signatures being gathered now for the 2012 presidential election are legitimate. He proposes having petition gatherers initial the sheets, and having officials undertake random audits to confirm that the signatures are real.http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/07/indiana-2008-presidential-primary-election-fraud-probe-heats-up/

So you're a unionized state employee, but you need to work like 5 other jobs to make ends meet. And your state employee boss doesn't pay any attention to safety regulations and makes you do dangerous stuff, unless it's written into a collective bargaining agreement.

Sounds like maybe your situation isn't all that typical. Just a guess.

It never ceases to amaze me that some folks beleive that being able to sit down at the table in order to negotiate safety rules & workplace conditions with an employer is considered "absurd and obscene."

--It never ceases to amaze me that some folks BELIEVE that protecting the jobs of child pornographers and sexual predators is considered a key union focus but not the safety of teachers from assault by students.

"The paycheck that gets direct-deposited every two weeks into my bank account says you're wrong. "

Simply because a check gets deposited by a government entity, does not make you an employee of that entity. Often as part of the contracted services, the government agrees to deposit the salary funds into an account agreed upon by the contracting party. It's simpler for both. I've seen a number of situations where the funds are not even sent to an employee, or a bank: but directly deposited with a payroll service. That service agrees to disburse the funds, draw the checks for FICA, union dues, healthcare costs, etc. This is done, and those persons are treated as private contractors so government can avoid fringe benefit costs.